| Literature DB >> 35893651 |
Maria Isabel Fuentes-Merlos1, Masaru Bamba1, Shusei Sato1, Atsushi Higashitani1.
Abstract
Grafting is a method used in agriculture to improve crop production and tolerance to biotic and abiotic stress. This technique is widely used in tomato, Solanum lycopersicum L.; however, the effects of grafting on changes in gene expression associated with stress tolerance in shoot apical meristem cells are still under-discovered. To clarify the effect of grafting, we performed a transcriptomic analysis between non-grafted and grafted tomatoes using the tomato variety Momotaro-scion and rootstock varieties, TD1, GS, and GF. Drought tolerance was significantly improved not only by a combination of compatible resistant rootstock TD1 but also by self-grafted compared to non-grafted lines. Next, we found the differences in gene expression between grafted and non-grafted plants before and during drought stress treatment. These altered genes are involved in the regulation of plant hormones, stress response, and cell proliferation. Furthermore, when comparing compatible (Momo/TD1 and Momo/Momo) and incompatible (Momo/GF) grafted lines, the incompatible line reduced gene expression associated with phytohormones but increased in wounding and starvation stress-response genes. These results conclude that grafting generates drought stress tolerance through several gene expression changes in the apical meristem.Entities:
Keywords: drought stress; grafting; phytohormones; tomato; transcriptomics
Year: 2022 PMID: 35893651 PMCID: PMC9332811 DOI: 10.3390/plants11151947
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Figure 1Grafting in tomato plants increases survival rate through the shoot apical meristem and apical dominance recovery from the axillary bud. (a) Schematic representation of the drought stress experimental design, marking the points of sample collection for RNA sequencing. D0 indicated before treatment and D3 indicates 3 d of drought stress treatment. GH = grafting healing, DS = drought stress. (b) Survival rates of all tomato lines after drought stress treatment. (c) Phenotype of self-grafted Momotaro (Momo/Momo) tomato recovery after 12 d of drought stress treatment through apical meristem, apical dominance, or no recovery. Control: TTM-079 [TD1 (n = 30)], green guard [GS (n = 30)], green force [GF (n = 30)], and Momo (n = 30). Grafted: Momo/TD1 (n = 19), Momo/GF (n = 8), and Momo/Momo (n = 16). Green = apical meristem, brown = apical dominance, and gray = no recovery. White scale = 1 cm.
Figure 2Control and grafted tomato lines show different gene expression pattern under normal and stress conditions. (a) Dendrogram of control and grafted tomato lines under D0 and D3. Brackets indicated sample lines that were grouped as control and grafted, and D0 and D3. (b) Heatmap of the gene expression in logarithm counts per million (Log2 CPM) of the different grafted combinations and non-grafted tomato lines. Red and blue indicate high and low expressions, respectively. Top brackets group the gene expression similarities between tomato lines. D0 and D3 indicates before drought stress and day 3 during drought stress treatment.
Figure 3Comparison of the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in grafted and control before drought stress treatment. (a) Volcano plot representation of DEGs up-regulated and down-regulated by grafting. The x axis shows Log2 fold change (FC) between Grafting vs. Control and y axis shows −Log10 (p-value). (b) Bar plot showing gene ontology (GO) enrichment analysis (Panther, false discovery rate < 0.05) for biological process in DEGs by grafted plants. Red and blue color indicate high and low gene expressions on significant DEGs (Adj. p < 0.05, Log2FC ≥ |1|). The x axis shows the number of genes categorized in each GO term (y axis).
List of hormone-related genes differentially expressed by grafting before drought stress (D0).
| Gene ID | Annotation | Log2FC * (Grafted /Control) | Adj. |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Solyc03g095780 | Abscisic acid receptor PYL4-like | 4.2 | 4.2 × 10−3 |
| Solyc09g015380 | Abscisic acid receptor PYL5 | 3.2 | 4.2 × 10−3 |
| Solyc06g050500 | Abscisic acid receptor PYL4-like | 3.2 | 9.6 × 10−3 |
| Solyc10g076410 | Abscisic acid receptor PYL6 | 3.0 | 2.0 × 10−2 |
| Solyc10g085310 | Abscisic acid receptor PYL5 | 2.4 | 5.5 × 10−3 |
| Solyc12g055990 | Abscisic acid receptor PYL10 | 1.2 | 4.4 × 10−3 |
|
| |||
| Solyc07g042490 | Auxin-responsive SAUR protein | 3.7 | 2.5 × 10−3 |
| Solyc02g037550 | Auxin efflux carrier | 2.6 | 4.8 × 10−3 |
| Solyc01g110580 | Small auxin up-regulated RNA5 | 1.4 | 5.2 × 10−3 |
| Solyc02g077560 | Auxin response factor 3 | 1.3 | 4.7 × 10−4 |
| Solyc01g110920 | Small auxin up-regulated RNA26 | 1.3 | 2.9 × 10−2 |
| Solyc09g007810 | Auxin Response Factor 16A | 1.0 | 2.0 × 10−3 |
| Solyc05g046320 | Small auxin up-regulated RNA55 | −1.1 | 1.3 × 10−2 |
| Solyc06g075150 | Auxin Response Factor 10B | −1.5 | 4.3 × 10−3 |
| Solyc01g099840 | Dormancy/auxin associated protein | −1.6 | 1.6 × 10−2 |
| Solyc02g077880 | Auxin-repressed protein | −2.6 | 1.2 × 10−3 |
|
| |||
| Solyc06g075090 | Cytokinin riboside 5-monophosphate phosphoribohydrolase | 1.7 | 3.7 × 10−3 |
| Solyc04g080820 | Cytokinin oxidase 4 | 1.4 | 4.6 × 10−2 |
| Solyc10g082020 | Cytokinin riboside 5-monophosphate phosphoribohydrolase | 1.2 | 2.4 × 10−2 |
| Solyc03g007460 | −1.5 | 1.6 × 10−2 | |
|
| |||
| Solyc04g011440 | Ethylene-responsive heat shock protein cognate 70 | 5.4 | 8.6 × 10−4 |
| Solyc09g059390 | Ethylene-responsive transcription factor | 4.9 | 1.8 × 10−2 |
| Solyc12g056590 | Ethylene Response Factor D.2 | 3.5 | 1.4 × 10−2 |
| Solyc01g090300 | Ethylene-responsive transcription factor 2 | 2.4 | 3.3 × 10−2 |
| Solyc06g065820 | Ethylene Response Factor H.1 | 2.0 | 4.5 × 10−2 |
| Solyc01g106820 | Ethylene-dependent gravitropism-deficient and yellow-green-like 3 | 1.9 | 9.6 × 10−3 |
| Solyc08g066660 | Ethylene-responsive transcription factor TINY | 1.8 | 3.8 × 10−2 |
| Solyc04g012050 | Ethylene-responsive transcription factor | 1.7 | 2.6 × 10−2 |
| Solyc03g118190 | Ethylene-responsive transcription factor | 1.7 | 4.4 × 10−2 |
| Solyc03g093610 | Ethylene response factor A.2 | 1.6 | 3.0 × 10−3 |
| Solyc01g006650 | ETHYLENE INSENSITIVE 3-like 3 protein | 1.5 | 1.0 × 10−2 |
| Solyc04g078640 | Ethylene-responsive transcription factor RAP2-1 | −1.3 | 3.9 × 10−2 |
| Solyc07g054220 | Ethylene-responsive transcription factor | −1.5 | 2.4 × 10−2 |
| Solyc06g019200 | Ethylene-dependent gravitropism-deficient and yellow-green-like 2 | −1.7 | 1.8 × 10−2 |
| Solyc08g007230 | Ethylene-responsive transcription factor 2 | −1.8 | 4.9 × 10−2 |
| Solyc02g088310 | Ethylene-responsive transcription factor | −2.0 | 1.1 × 10−2 |
|
| |||
| Solyc02g083880 | Gibberellin-regulated protein 3 | 4.2 | 4.3 × 10−4 |
| Solyc01g150176 | Gibberellin-regulated protein | 3.9 | 4.8 × 10−4 |
| Solyc03g113910 | Gibberellin-regulated protein 14 | 2.9 | 2.7 × 10−3 |
| Solyc12g042500 | Gibberellin-regulated family protein | 1.8 | 3.3 × 10−2 |
| Solyc09g074270 | Gibberellin receptor | 1.5 | 7.6 × 10−3 |
|
| |||
| Solyc01g103595 | Jasmonate ZIM domain protein l | 2.0 | 4.2 × 10−2 |
* Logarithm fold change between grafted and control (Log2 FC > |1|, Adj. p-value < 0.05).
Figure 4Differentially expressed genes (DEGs) and enriched pathways in grafted and control shoot apical meristem before drought stress and day 3 during stress. Volcano plot representation of DEGs up-regulated and down-regulated by drought stress treatment in (a) control and (b) grafted samples. The x axis shows logarithm fold change (Log2FC [D3/D0]) and y axis shows –Log10 (p-value). Significant DEGs (Adj. p < 0.05, Log2FC ≥ |1|) are in red and blue for up-regulation and down-regulation. (c) Bar plot showing gene ontology (GO) enrichment analysis (Panther, false discovery rate (FDR) < 0.05) for biological processes on significant DEGs of the control and grafted samples. Empty bars indicate the control and fill bars indicate the grafted samples. The x axis shows the number of genes categorized in each GO term (y axis). (d) Comparison of the DEGs in the grafted and control samples during stress. The x axis shows logarithm fold change (Log2FC [Grafting/Control]) and y axis shows –Log10 (p-value). (e) Bar plot showing GO enrichment analysis (Panther, FDR < 0.05) for biological process in DEGs by the grafted samples. Red and blue color indicate higher and lower gene expression on significant DEGs (Adj. p < 0.05, Log2FC ≥ |1|). The x axis shows the –Log10 (p-value) categorized in each GO term (y axis).
Figure 5Changes in gene expression of 4 genes differentially expressed by grafting or drought stress assessed by quantitative real-time PCR. (a) Heat shock protein (Solyc08g062450); (b) Ascorbate peroxidase (Solyc09g007270); (c) Chlorophyll a–b binding protein (Solyc08g067330); and (d) 9-cis-epoxycaratenoid dioxygenase (Solyc07g056570). Gray bars represent before treatment (D0) and black bars represent 3 days drought stress treatment (D3). Asterisks denote significant differences according to t-test (Wilcoxon test) between D0 and D3 of each line, where * indicate p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001, and **** p < 0.0001. No significance is denoted as ns. Error bars represent the standard error from 3 biological replicates with 3 technical replicates.
Figure 6Compatible [Momotaro shoot (Momo)/TTM-079 (TD1) and Momo/Momo] and incompatible grafted lines [Momo/green force (GF)] show differentially expressed genes revealed by transcriptomic analysis. Gene ontology (GO) analysis classification on (a) reduced gene expression on DEGs by Momo/GF (fold change ≥ 2, Momo/TD1, Momo/Momo vs. Momo/GF) and (b) increased gene expression on DEGs by Momo/GF (fold change ≤ 0.5, Momo/TD1, Momo/Momo vs. Momo/GF). The x axis shows the number of genes of each GO cluster classification, and the y axis shows the GO ontology term.
List of differentially expressed genes with potential significance to identify compatible grafts [Momotaro (Momo)/TTM-079 (TD1) and Momo/Momo] vs. incompatible [Momo/green force (GF)] lines.
| Gene ID | Annotation | Log2FC * (Compatible vs. Incompatible) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Momo/TD1 vs. Momo/GF | Momo/Momo vs. Momo/GF | ||
|
| |||
| Solyc04g079930 | Histone deacetylase complex subunit | 1.0 | 1.3 |
| Solyc07g008540 | Zinc finger protein CONSTANS-LIKE 2 | 1.2 | 1.8 |
|
| |||
| Solyc05g047590 | Pectinesterase | 1.3 | 1.8 |
| Solyc06g050500 | Abscisic acid receptor PYL4-like | 1.2 | 1.6 |
|
| |||
| Solyc08g061130 | Transcription factor HY5 | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| Solyc09g065660 | Heat shock transcription factor | 1.6 | 3.6 |
|
| |||
| Solyc02g088240 | Phosphate transporter PHO1-like protein 5 | −2.6 | −2.9 |
| Solyc08g068240 | Phosphate transporter PHO1-like protein | −1.2 | −1.7 |
|
| |||
| Solyc01g103860 | COBRA-like protein | −1.2 | −1.0 |
| Solyc03g114900 | COBRA-like protein | −2.1 | −3.0 |
|
| |||
| Solyc08g036660 | Jasmonate ZIM domain protein f | −4.7 | −3.6 |
| Solyc08g036640 | Jasmonate ZIM domain protein f | −3.1 | −2.4 |
* Logarithm fold change between compatible and incompatible (Log2FC > |1| RPKM).